Seems an awful lot of complaints just to be ignored. On an additional note does the ITC stand for Independent televison (makers) commission or the Independent (and therefore not biased) television commission. Whilst I am sick of people banging the Human rights act, I find myself strangley drawn towards this case or do I merley hate paying my licence fee to be told what I am watching, and fund various Yoof programmes, and anti mil news stories.

So the BBC conducts its own enquiry and finds for itself, OK I can live with that. Don't watch, totally agree. My point is can we now look forward to an adaptation of Satanic verses or a broadcast of the recent play everyone got so worked up about, IMO no, probably not. I still think 55,000 odd complaints (there must have been more than the usual bible bashers voting methinks) is a huge number.

Or was it Bible bashers learning from the US and getting the campaign going on the internet, don't forget I think one tabloid was involved as well. how many complaints were recieved after the performance?

I didn't watch it as I had better things to do, but hey I did not watch Wagners latest opera over easter either. Just cos I don't watch it does not mean it should have been shown. At the end of the Day the Beeb has charter to show a range of stuff inc modern opera/theatre. Better than the dross the fills must of ITVs schedule.

Yep I get your point, however, I was talking about the play the muslims were on about. I'm all for the BBC showing a range of programmes but I still think I'll be waiting for a satanic verses mini series.

This is pretty straight forward censorship. I wonder how many of those trying to stop the Springer opera from airing were amongst the many who condemned the Sikhs (or Muslims, can't remember which now) from stopping a Birmingham theatre showing a controversial show about their religion? (Which ever one it was).

Also interesting to note that for this one show 55,000 complaints were registered. Seems an awful lot really, given the amount of tripe Channel 4 have shown in the last couple of years alone.

The ultimate censorship is the TV button. And, that, ultimately, won. Whatever conclusions the BBC draws from this, it was a ratings flop - especially considering the publicity the BBC got for the show. Most of which was free, from the likes of the Daily Mail and other national media sources. If a show only gets 4 million with all that beforehand, it is a failure. Simple as.

Quite liked the Opera myself "Three nipple cousin fecker" still makes me snigger whenever I see inbred Yank God-botherers on the telly.
Douglas Adams (Is there an artificial God - The Salmon of Doubt, 2002 Macmillan, pp141) once pointed out that we're allowed - even expected - to mock or question any idea providing it's not related to Religion no matter how daft or irrelevent or demonstrably wrong it is. If an idea related to someones beliefs we're not supposed to question it for fear of giving offence.

Now, the invention of the scientific method and science is, Iâm sure weâll all agree, the most powerful intellectual idea, the most powerful framework for thinking and investigating and understanding and challenging the world around us that there is, and that it rests on the premise that any idea is there to be attacked and if it withstands the attack then it lives to fight another day and if it doesnât withstand the attack then down it goes. Religion doesnât seem to work like that; it has certain ideas at the heart of it which we call sacred or holy or whatever. Thatâs an idea weâre so familiar with, whether we subscribe to it or not, that itâs kind of odd to think what it actually means, because really what it means is âHere is an idea or a notion that youâre not allowed to say anything bad about; youâre just not. Why not? â because youâre not!â If somebody votes for a party that you donât agree with, youâre free to argue about it as much as you like; everybody will have an argument but nobody feels aggrieved by it. If somebody thinks taxes should go up or down you are free to have an argument about it, but on the other hand if somebody says âI mustnât move a light switch on a Saturdayâ, you say, âFine, I respect thatâ. The odd thing is, even as I am saying that I am thinking âIs there an Orthodox Jew here who is going to be offended by the fact that I just said that?â but I wouldnât have thought âMaybe thereâs somebody from the left wing or somebody from the right wing or somebody who subscribes to this view or the other in economicsâ when I was making the other points. I just think âFine, we have different opinionsâ. But, the moment I say something that has something to do with somebodyâs (Iâm going to stick my neck out here and say irrational) beliefs, then we all become terribly protective and terribly defensive and say âNo, we donât attack that; thatâs an irrational belief but no, we respect itâ.